The Effect of Ordering Decisions by Choice-Set Size on Consumer Search

Abstract

Consumers frequently engage in sequential decisions. This article explores whether the order of these decisions can influence the manner in which consumers search through the possible choice options. Results from five studies suggest that ordering decisions by increasing (vs. decreasing) choice-set size leads to greater search depth (measured by both sampling count and decision time). Initial, smaller choice sets in increasing sequences appear to initiate a maximizing mind-set, which then persists even as participants encounter later, larger choice sets. These participants report a greater desire to maximize and are less satisfied with their decisions, consistent with research on chronic maximizers. In addition, they continue to exhibit maximizing behavior in subsequent, unrelated tasks, supporting a mind-set account of the differences in search. In sum, decision makers are proposed to be "sticky adapters": initial decision strategies seem to constrain the extent to which they adapt to new contexts.Watch out for the fellow who talks about putting things in order! Putting things in order always means getting other people under your control. (Denis Diderot) C onsumers frequently engage in sequential decisions.For instance, grocery store shoppers fill their shopping baskets one item at a time, restaurant diners order their meal one course at a time, and computer buyers configure their laptops one component at a time. Each decision in the sequence might require choosing from a different number of options. Imagine that a homeowner who renovates her apartment engages in a sequence of decision steps: she might have to choose between 50 different tiles, 20 different wallJonathan Levav (jlevav@stanford.edu) is associate professor of marketing at the Graduate paint colors, and five different wallpaper designs. In this article, we explore how ordering decision sequences by choice-set size (i.e., ordering decisions according to their number of options) influences the depth of consumer search.Order is important in many contexts, from impression formation (Asch 1946) to judgments of hedonic experiences (Ariely and Zauberman 2000). However, previous research about order in consumer search has limited its focus to the effect of ordering options within a specific choice set (e.g., Dellaert and Häubl 2012;Dellaert and Stremersch 2005;Diehl 2005;Diehl, Kornish, and Lynch 2003;Häubl, Dellaert, and Donkers 2010). The influence of decision order on search has, to our knowledge, remained unexplored.Although there are many psychologically meaningful variables by which to order a decision sequence, we focus on order by choice-set size for two key reasons. First, set size can be objectively determined, and therefore it is an easy variable for firms to control. Second, and more importantly, previous research shows that set size can exert a substantial influence on consumers' psychology and consequently on their decisions. For example, large choice sets can demotivate purchases (Iyengar and Lepper 2000) or lead to decision simplification (I...

Information overload or search-amplified risk? Set size and order effects on decisions from experience

“…Foremost, choiceset size and choice order influenced information search (as in Levav et al, 2010;Levav et al, 2012), with effects on the total samples taken, proportions of gambles sampled, samples per gamble, and the propensity to switch between gambles. Information processing, on the other hand, appeared to scale across set sizes, contradicting one of the core explanations for choice overload (discussed in Scheibehenne et al, 2010).…”

“…Second, our choices are often sequential, with the order of choice-set sizes varying from one decision to the next (e.g., there may be more kinds of cheese than bananas). As a result, the order of choice sets may lead to choiceset size effects that carry over from one decision to the next (Levav, Heitmann, Herrmann, & Iyengar, 2010;Levav, Reinholtz, & Lin, 2012). This points to the need for a more fine-grained and practically relevant study of information processing under choice overload.…”

“…Recent work on choice order effects has shown that varying the order of choice environments-for instance, making choices among many options before choices among fewer optionscan influence choices even after set sizes have decreased (Levav et al, 2010;Levav et al, 2012). For example, Levav et al (2012) found that when people chose songs among varying sizes of music selections, they listened to fewer songs before choosing one when set sizes varied from many to few songs than when set sizes varied from few to many. Similarly, in a naturalistic study on car buyers, buyers who saw vehicle options (e.g., engine types and gearshift styles) were more likely to choose the default option if they experienced choices with many (as opposed to few) alternatives first (Levav et al, 2010).…”

“…In particular, people who sample more and switch less often between gambles are more likely to choose gambles with higher expected values. Because choice order effects may lead to more sampling for individuals who sample few items first (Levav et al, 2012), it follows that these individuals may also be more likely to choose gambles with higher expected values.…”

“…How would this influence choices when set sizes are large? In Levav et al (2012), increasing set sizes of songs led to less information being sampled per song, but more songs being sampled in total. If this were to be the case in the sequential-sampling paradigm with many gambles, we could predict that participants would be more likely to experience a rare event, because they would sample more risky gambles.…”